tv Hardball With Chris Matthews MSNBC May 2, 2013 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
christie in with less than 50% of the vote. if it hadn't been for that, he wouldn't be what he is right now. >> steve kranaki, host of "up" saturdays and sundays at 8:00 to 10:00 a.m. >> that's right. >> gets the last word. chris hayes, who used to do "up" which steve now does is actually up next. strategy of doom. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start tonight with this. imagine being a member of a political party whose only initiative, whose only recent mission, whose only active purpose these days is to find ways to keep member of the other party, blacks, young people, the elderly, from voting? and oh yeah, keeping the president of the united states from getting anything done. meet the republican party of mitch mcconnell, john boehner, and, yes, reince priebus. look at its agenda on gun safety. do nothing, or should i say
nutin' at all? or should i say, nothing at all. leave it the way it is. getting bargain basement wages for people who businesses can make a lot of money? keep it up. government deficits in to deal. cut meals on wheels, cut the soup kitchens, while as jon stewart puts it, keeping the food cart moving on first class. welcome to the plan. stop people from voting on the democratic side. stop a democratically elected president from doing his elected job. is this why people go into politics? is it about doing nothing? is nothing sacred? michael steele was chairman of the republican party back when it made sense. eugene robinson is a pulitzer prize winning columnist from the "washington post." anyway, senator pat toomey co-authored the compromise on background checks. we like him for that. on guns. this week he said the reason it failed had to do with republican opposition to the president. let's listen to the senator from pennsylvania. >> i thought that we had settled
on a really common sense approach that ought to be able to achieve a consensus. i think in the end we didn't because our politics have become so polarized. and there are people on my side who didn't want to be perceived to be helping something that the president wants to accomplish. simply because it's the president who wants to accomplish it. >> well, according to the "times herald" toomey tried to clarify the statement in the same meeting. he said he was referring to republicans across the nation, not just across the aisle in the senate. "the new york times'" reporter write, what toomey was reserving to there goes deeper and wider than gun safety. "republicans are clearly looking to do more than deprive mr. obama victories. however. the ultimate goal is to make him appear powerless and weak, a flailing figure unable to affect the midterm elections or give the next democratic nominee a boost. taking heat on a gun vote is
worth it if it leads to a reporter asking the president whether he has any juice left with congress as one did yesterday and leads to a bigger payoff if the president stumbles in his response, forced to assert rumors of his demise are premature." michael steele, has the republican party adapted? we don't want nothing done, we don't want this guy to get anything done. that's our primary purpose. >> i think the latter of that is certainly true. it goes back to mitch mcconnell's opening salvo on the night of the inauguration where they got together and said, you know, one-term president. so, yeah, i think that's the political operative or operation of this whole thing. >> is that a party-building move for your side? >> i don't think it's a party-building move. as chairman, one thing i always wanted to do was contrast what we philosophically believed, what our principles were against the policies and the direction that the president wanted to take the country. that, i think, is a fair debate to have. and people of, you know, all
stripes can agree or disagree. but when you just do the political, without some level of work, i mean, gingrich and clinton worked it out. they got some good things done. reagan and tip o'neill fought like cats and dogs on policy, but they found a way to work it out. this kind of stalemate is not good. the people in the country don't want it. i think the party long term could hurt itself with a lot of voters. >> i want to get back to that. i think the republican party has a two-strike goal. reduce the electoral. tactical, maybe strategic. then other part of it is, don't let this president be a hero to anybody. >> well, it's not working, though. >> isn't it? i'm wondering. >> but the voter suppression didn't work. they tried to limit the vote -- >> and the courts came in. yeah. >> but they voted in larger numbers. >> yeah. >> the the black turnout was higher than white turnout in this last election. so -- >> of course, republican courts, too. >> absolutely. because gene, the law is the law.
you know? and the constitution is the constitution. so that didn't work. and the idea of making him not a hero to anybody, i don't think that works either. now, it kind of depends on how president obama reacts, but when you're president of the united states, you do have juice. there is stuff you can do. >> was it an odd question? >> it was a very odd question. >> it seemed like a -- it reminded me of o.j. electricity juice. what kind of juice are we talking about? political juice, clout, muscle? >> i think it was also an appropriate question. i mean, look, the bottom line is the president has seeded a lot of ground. >> let's start on that. let's take the three big issue. did the president blow it on guns or did the other side basically put up a big wall and say we're not giving you nothing? >> i think he blew it on guns. i think the speech he gave after he was defeated in the senate vote was a speech he should have given the very next day after sandy hook to make sure the line was very clear. as you talked about on this show many times, johnson made it very clear, we're going to get
something done, we got to get it done on guns or, you know -- >> civil rights back in '64. >> there is a timing -- i think that's a fair shot, although it's looking backwards. let's talk about this issue of immigration which is, to me, the big gold star for this guy. if he doesn't get immigration in the next three years, he has not had a successful legislative term here. my question is, are the people like ted cruz out to basically stifle any bill? >> oh, i think so. they're going to try -- >> any bill. >> i think -- you know, immigration is difficult because it's so clearly in the interest of republican party. >> to get the -- >> to get -- >> it off their back. >> get it off their back. and so there's going to be a lot of pushback from the republican establishment that says, wait a minute, we need to do this. however, that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to get through. that dynamic -- >> they still have -- you know, i think i like your parallel to tip and reagan because there's one parallel clear there.
the reason republicans agree to social security reform in '83, they kept getting beat on it. >> i'm not sure how much president obama can intervene in the battles inside the republican party. what he can do is use executive powers, bully pulpit and veto pen -- >> let's talk about the constitution we all grew up. we're about the same age. i was telling this to our producers today, younger than me, a lot of them. the constitution doesn't guarantee the united states senate represents the american people. it represents the states. if you look at a map of the united states, most of the map physically is republican and conservative. it's rural. it's vast spaces in the south. and especially in the rocky mountain west. >> yep. >> all that space is represented in many cases by republican senators. >> right. >> who are pro gun. >> right. >> when you go to have a vote, 90% of the country wants background checks expanded. the senate goes the other direction. you go, whoa, it could be because the senate is representing land. you're laughing. the people out there in big cities go, what happened to my
vote? my vote doesn't count as much as the guy living in utah. senators of new york and california represent about 20% of the country i think and 4 senators out of 100. a guy from utah, you may not know the guy from utah, the second one, you probably do. he has as much clout as gillibrand in new york. >> that's a dynamic people underestimated doing into the fight, why from the very beginning on this show i took note of what harry reid said on the whole start of this gun debate. he pretty much said, we'll take a look. basically we're going to slow this down because he understood the very principle you just identified that the vote doesn't line up with necessarily the sentiment. >> let's take a look at this. republican national committee has a new ad out there. it's a web ad. these are the cheap ones they don't spend much money on. we, of course, cover them. they're practically gloating. this has priebus' name all over it, or his nature. >> only 100 days into his second term, already faced a string of defeats in congress. >> do you still have the juice
to get the rest of your agenda through this congress? >> put it that way, jonathan, maybe i should just pack up and go home. >> the gun bill failed. the sequester appears here to stay, and immigration reform is still a glimmer of hope largely because the president has stayed out of it. >> maybe i should just pack up and go home. >> i don't know who was the first guy or woman to make that ad. the guy's not really standing up street. he's on a not diagonal. the music is strange. the voice, sarcastic. >> that's politics. >> politics, where does it take you in the end? barack obama's not running for anything. he's not going to run for anything. there are things he wants to do for -- >> gene, you and i agree on a lot of things. he wants it in the history books. he wants unemployment rate to go
down. he wants it in the history books. how does he get in the history books if the republicans stymie him? maybe he can get past the gun thing. immigration is his baby. if they say no, if people like ted cruz and mike lee of utah, the junior senator out there, people like rand paul blow it, they say 60 votes or nothing, they keep from getting the 60, he'll never get in the house and nothing's going to happen. gene, who wins then? >> well -- >> gene? >> well, then he doesn't get the bill. >> so the scorched earth policy works. so the negativity the republican party gets what it wants, a noncreative president. >> does the president get to determine what the house and what the senate do? no. he doesn't get -- >> the public expects it. >> the public holds the president responsible. i think he should throw some elbows. >> didn't he say, in a pretty rough elbow there, in basketball
terms in the press conference? >> i think members of the senate and the house should feel they have to pay for these if they're going to vote against him. i don't think taking him to dinner or lunch is going to solve it. >> the only people who are getting hurt are the people who don't like kelly ayotte this week. people like heidi heitkamp in north dakota, they're doing swimmingly who voted against the -- >> he's got the ultimate tool, chris, it's called that bully pulpit. he's used it ineffectively. >> the latest "new york times"/cbs poll. voters in general and republicans specifically overwhelmingly back the president's position on background checks for gun purchases. and his role, position on path to citizenship under immigration reform. take a look at this. 86% of republicans say there should be stronger background checks. this is republicans. 84% say there should be a path to citizenship.
offer for illegal immigrants. despite the overwhelming support for these issues that obama agrees with, the country is deeply divided over who they trust on the issues of gun and immigration. catch this. you'll like this, michael. republicans in congress, i have to say, have a slight edge when it comes to guns. president has a slight end on immigration. on the topics of guns and immigration, look at what congressman jack kingston, smart guy from georgia, told "the new york times" about what backing he gets back home. "there was a lot of washington talk about the gun bills possibilities but i never saw that reflected in the people at home. now there's all this buzz about the immigration reform. and that is not reflected, either." gene, all this -- these big polls reflect popular opinion including a lot of votes in the big cities and the suburbs. you get out into rural areas in this country, which is a lot of this country, conservative views on guns and immigration. >> that's true. but those numbers are not insignificant. if you've got 86% who say they favor something -- >> it should include the rural
areas. >> by nature, you're using the bully pulpit pretty well, right? because he's got public opinion on his side, on these issues. now, maybe there's some level of trust of confidence reflected in that second group of figures where it's much closer. maybe there's something else he needs to do. i'm not quite sure what that is. you get 86%. you figure you won the issue. >> i have to go something so primitive, people wonder if i'm serious. i've always wondered whether people tell the pollsters what they want to hear. >> yes, they do. >> somebody with a perfect -- do you give people what they think they want to hear? of course i'm for gun safety. are you for background checks for people who are criminally insane? >> people don't know who -- >> would conservatives from your party cover up their -- >> not just on the conservative side but i think even on the liberal side on issues like gay marriage and abortion.
i think you find -- >> are you sure? i think liberals are more -- >> my e-mail doesn't count because -- >> no, your e-mail will count. i'm just saying looking at -- i don't take a one for one correlation between what i see in a popular poll and then hue that's going to translate -- >> i'm trying to figure out why this country isn't getting reflected in congress. the only way to explain it is problems with the polling which you can always talk about. it's this visceral thing. mostly the guy, the white guy, mostly, who's gun absorbed. let's be honest about it. absorbed without putting a negative on it. really believes in the second amendment. cares deeply about it and is going to remember every one of these voting opportunities. he's going to take that position. on immigration, are people ethnically conservative? it's not that they're racist or anything. they want the things the way they were. are they less likely to give up a fight? got to go. thank you, gentlemen. michael steele.
thank you, gene robinson. the group emily's list says the nation is ready for a woman president and have begun their campaign to put a woman in the white house. wonder who they're thinking about. our new "hardball" feature comes on tonight, the unkindest cut. remember shakespeare? republicans like to say president obama is exaggerating the pain from the sequester cuts, but let's see about that. let's ask the people who run soup kitchens, for example, and food pantries in this country. see how they're doing on these cuts. we will tonight. remember how republicans said they had to change after the 2012 elections? then explain why the rising star of the gop right now is someone who wants things even further to the right. republicans have. the republican in this case is ted cruz. he could be the next barry goldwater, he says. actually i sort of like goldwater. this guy doesn't seem quite as nice. finally leave it to the global warming is a hoax governor. who says the government is out there buying the bullets in country so the rest of us are being denied our gun rights. paranoia, you think? this is "hardball."
the place for politics. we're all set to bundle your home and auto insurance together. i'll just press this, and you'll save on both. [bell dings] ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, llllet's get ready to bundlllllle... [ holding final syllable ] oh, yeah, sorry! let's get ready to bundle and save. now, that's progressive. oh, i think i broke my spleen!
well, we've seen a lot of polling that suggests senators who voted against background checks are suffering in public opinion polls. today evidence that two red state democrats up for re-election next year actually helped themselves by voting yes on expanded background checks. look at this. according to a new ppp poll, 45% of louisiana voters say they're more likely to vote for senator mary landrieu because she voted for background checks versus just a quarter of the voters who say they're less likely. in north carolina, women are more likely to vote for senator kay hagan because of her vote. again, only a quarter said they're less likely to support her. they're looking in good shape. the poll found three quarters of voters in both states say they favor background checks. we'll be right back.
clinton in 2016 grows louder. last night i was there when secretary clinton received and award from the atlanta council here in washington. former secretary of state henry kissinger was there to introduce her and did a good job. here he is. >> at least four secretaries of state became presidents, and that sort of started focusing my mind. i want to tell hillary when she misses the office, she looks at the history of secretary of state, it might be hope for a fulfilling life afterwards. >> here was secretary clinton responding. >> when i became secretary of state, i spent a lot of time
thinking about my illustrious predecessors and not primarily the ones who went on to become president. >> well, they may be kidding about the obvious last night. everybody knows who was in the room, the polling out there of how serious hillary talk is. i guess maybe franklin roosevelt in '32 had these numbers or ike in '52. look at these numbers. write them down. 65% support her for president. that number goes with both women. men are one point more for it than women, actually. joe biden is the only candidate in the world with double digits. he's way behind her. andrew cuomo. o'malley, the governor of maryland. barely get into the money here. how is this for an interesting piece of news? it was just announced this afternoon hillary clinton and new jersey governor chris christie will be featured attractions at an event for the global clinton initiative in chicago next month. the stated focus will, be, quote, speeding up the united states' economic recovery and nation's long-term outlook. the sub text, of course, 2016. steve mcmahon is the democratic strategist, of course, we all love.
and jess mcintosh is spokesperson for emily's list, working to get women elected. to get women elected president of the united states. jess, thank you for coming here to "hardball." lay it out. emily's list. wonder what you're thinking about. >> thanks for having me. we launched the madam president campaign today. supports progressive women. 2012 was a mandate for women's leadership. so with our mission, we expanded -- >> i'm sorry. what do you mean by that? >> we elect pro-choice democratic women. >> what happened in 2012? what was the mandate? >> we elected a historic number of democratic women to congress and emily list's quintupled its membership. there's so much enthusiasm around putting women in leadership positions. we -- >> how many members do you have? >> over 2 million now. >> wow. >> we ended the -- >> who's paying? >> taking action with us. they're sharing, signing petitions. >> is there ever in the history of this country been a group like this? >> as far as we know we're the only ones committed to putting
women in office. we think that's how we're to build a more progressive america. >> is there a group for men like that? >> 250 years to build that network. we're catching up. >> i give you the setup there. steve, this is fascinating. you're a political expert here. actually i did point out the oddity perfect that more men, one more percent, are for hillary. at least men have one other candidate in mind besides biden, they have cuomo in mind. women only have in mind the vice president or hillary clinton. overwhelmingly the former secretary of state. >> yeah, if you look at this as a phenomena, it's the first time really it's happened. you have women candidates who have gotten a disproportionate share of women voters then men lag behind. >> california, isn't it 60% of the democratic voters are women? >> it's about 58%. >> yeah, women have been deciding our elections for cycles, for decades. so it's about time we gave them strong women to vote for. they came out, we had a historic gender gap last cycle in 2012. i think we've seen republicans move farther and farther to the right alienating the women
voters they need to win. they show no signs of having learned from those mistakes. and so we're expecting 2014 is going to be a good cycle. >> in a normal general election, 53% of the electorate are women. women decide elections every single day. this group, emily's list, has been doing a great job for women candidates for a long, long time. this project that they're going is going to send shivers up the spine of any man thinking of running for president. if you put emily's list behind a single woman -- >> i know those lines. >> whether it's hillary clinton or amy klobuchar or kirsten gillibrand or any of the women thinking about running for president, if you can unite women behind that candidacy, it's almost unstoppable. >> okay. let's look at it. i like to visualize these things. we're on television. we're in iowa, probably this network, msnbc, one of the others, democratic party in this case, they'll probably hold a big debate, say, in 2013. i'm sorry, 2015. >> yes.
>> it may be early in 2015. you'll have a row of people there. i don't know -- i don't think al sharpton is running again. i don't know anybody else running again. it will probably be martin o'malley, governor of maryland. it may be the -- do you think the vice president -- this is where it gets interesting. if secretary clinton runs, do you think the vice president will take her on, or step aside and say, no, her time has come? >> i think we can't visualize that stage until we know what she's doing. i think just about everybody, male and female in the democratic party is waiting to see what happens. >> are you pushing her to run? >> we would certainly love her to run. >> if you don't get her to run, who's your candidate for president? >> we have a strong bench that is just as good and viable as martin o'malleys and andrew cuomos. >> who's your best -- >> klobuchar, gillibrand. >> the senator from minnesota, very popular in this city, and certainly gillibrand is really good. very impressive.
i'm not sure they have the name i.d. yet. >> jess is right. hillary clinton is about the great big eclipse blocking the sun and keeping everything from growing. >> in a positive way. >> in a positive way. she'll sit out there for a while because it suits her political or financial interests. she makes a lot of money giving these speeches. >> tell the public that doesn't follow politics every three seconds like you do why she should stay out of the game for at least a year. >> first of all, she gets $200,000 per speech. secondly, it keeps her name out there and at 65% in the polls. it freezes the field and gives -- >> as soon as she announce, all the republican out there who don't like her will say so. >> the longer she stays in if she doesn't run, the better it is for joe biden. she keeps andrew cuomo and others from getting out of the starting gate. >> i'm not relevant to your cause, but i think emily's list is great. i think it's going be a great campaign in 2016. i'll be covering it. i just found out i'll be here doing it. let me tell you what else i think. i think it could be a positive thing for the democrats. hillary clinton will be a notch
or two to the right of this president. i think she'll find a good sweet spot there. somewhere to the right on foreign policy. little notch. domestic policy, i'm not sure where she's going to be. there's going to be plenty of space on the spectrum for other people to run against her. martin o'malley maybe. i think deval patrick would be a good candidate. there are a lot of -- perhaps another woman candidate. i think it will be fabulous. >> there's space but may not be courage. it takes courage. >> they're crazy not to run. if you run with hillary, you'll be on the same stage with a great person and you're going to look great. steve mcmahon. jess mcintosh. please come back. up next, you say you want a revolution. how about half the republicans think it may be coming? this is a scary number. i'm in a happy mood, now i'm not. a lot of people in this country think we're headed toward an actual revolution to protect our civil liberties like in 1776. what's in their food? this is "hardball." the place for politics. why let constipation weigh you down?
as soon as you feel it, try miralax. it works differently than other laxatives. it draws water into your colon to unblock your system naturally. don't wait to feel great. miralax. take the miralax pledge to feel better sooner. get a reward like a beauty treatment, a dance class or a $5 gift card with purchase of a specially marked pack. go to miralax.com for details.
ha! back to "hardball." now to the sideshow. conspiracy edition. mm. how do we know conspiracy theories are growing about the government? a survey asked people if they thought armed revolt might be necessary to protect civil liberties in this country. buckle your seat belts on these answers. 29% said it might be necessary in this country. break it down by party, 18% of democrats agreed armed revolt might be necessary to protect our civil liberties. but 44% of republicans said so. so that's 3-10 all together who say we may be headed for armed rebellion. doing their part to help the conspiracy cause along, senator inhofe, of course, of the global warming is a hoax theory. his former republican oklahoma congressman frank lucas. according to inhofe, "president obama has been adamant about
cushing law-abiding americans' access and opportunities to exercise their second amendment rights. one way the obama administration is able to do that," he says "is by limiting what's available in the market with federal agencies purchasing unnecessary stockpiles of ammunition. so as he say, inhofe, the government is out there secretly buying up all the bullets so there won't be any of those bullets out there in the stores for rest of us. inhofe and lucas proposed a bill last week that would ban federal agencies from buying ammunition if their agency stockpile is larger than it was under the bush administration. only the pentagon would be exempt. well, they've got company here. here's new hampshire senator, representative, state senator, actually state representative edmond gionet who had a question for republican senator kelly ayotte at a town hall meeting on tuesday. >> one of the things that concerns my constituent, the majority of my constituents, is that the appointments that are now being made in washington by
our president and the way he's handling immigrants and nationalizing them and giving them the opportunity to vote and wanting to keep track of our guns. they're worried we have to use our own guns. is there anything in washington that says, any telltale signs, we might be headed to a revolution given the fact these things are going on? that's what was said in the group i'm in. >> sounds like the poll results we just gave you are at work in that guy's head. serious by election. by the way, senator ayotte at the town meeting, running it, in fact, did not express concern in her answer about an armed revolt. anyway. there's republican state senator trella tremblay who alerted her constituents to a video suggesting president obama was not born in the united states now says she's convinced the boston marathon attack was a hoax.
why? according to tremblay, one of the victims didn't seem to be in enough pain. >> my first gut reaction seeing the horror of that person that had their legs blown off, you know, with the bones sticking out -- >> yes, ma'am. >> and he was not in shock and i looked and i thought, there's something -- i don't know what's wrong, but it seems surreal to me. he was not in shock. he was not in pain. >> again, tremblay, that state senator is an elected official of the state of new hampshire and credits extreme right wing conspiracy theorist alex jones. up next, the unkindest cut. how those automatic across the board spending cuts are hurting the most vulnerable people in the country while congress steps in to help people who hardly need it. you're watching "hardball." the place for politics.
we're challenged. sequester is hurting. sequester is hurting in a big, big way. we serve over a million meals a day. these aren't the people that can go out and shout in the streets and make sure that the folks up on capitol hill know what's going on. now you're truly shut in. >> welcome back to "hardball."
last night way brought you chairman of the board of directors for the meals on wheels association of america to explain the toll, the across the board spending cuts known as sequester, some of america's most vulnerable people. here's the director of the community oncology alliance talking about the effects of these arbitrary cuts on some cancer patients. >> i had spoke to another practice administrator in salt lake city. she has an 82-year-old patient, a lymphoma survivor who has to travel 62 miles. >> you already have cancer, now you have this. we've told you about some of the programs hurt by sequester huts. special education and head start, of course. that's just a sampling. we're going to keep track, by the way, of those for whom these cuts are the unkindest of all. usually the poor, elderly, disabled and disenfranchised generally. we're going to call it the unkindest cut from shakespeare, of course. affects people who use food
pantries and soup kitchens. joe berg is executive director of an umbrella soup for soup kitchens across the country and food pantries many of which are partially federally funded. josh green for "bloomberg business week." gentlemen, thank you for joining us. tell us what this sequestration which seems like a theory to a lot of people is doing to your work? >> it has eliminated our new york city vista americorps program. americorps is a domestic peace corps that allows low income and middle-class kids to serve their nation and get a small educational award in exchange. we had 11 people placed in soup kitchens and food pantries in new york city and that has been eliminated by the sequestration. also the sequestration cut $5 million out of the fema emergency food and shelter program. the main source of federal cash for soup kitchens, food pantry, food banks and homelessness prevention organizations around the country. that program was already slashed
over the last three years and is is now 60% lets than in 2009. >> of course the weather's getting a little better. it's not as bad in the shelter as in the harshness of winter. anybody who watches homeless people in the winter can only feel for them when they get under the cardboard boxes and stuff. how many people have you had to turn people back for lunch or dinner, that kind of thing? >> the national cuts are going to take away at least a few million meals. here in new york city because of the other cuts, 2/3 of the soup kitchens and food pantries in new york city already have to ration food. turn people away. reduce portions size. reduce hours of operation. and this is a city that has 53 billionaires with combined net worth of $230 billion. we can certainly afford, as a city and as a nation, to fund these programs, but we're not. >> that's terrible. let me go to josh green. your view about this as a reporter.
this is so far an unreported story. we're going to do our bid here, on the unkindness cut, a line from a speech of what happened to cesar. this is what happened to little people, not cesar. we're getting a lot of attention, we had a lot of talk about the fact the air traffic controllers had to get their money. that that was an exception. my question, it's a political question, why doesn't some smart liberal, or progressive, on the floor of the house, bring a bill to the floor that says why don't we bring back the meals on wheels program? why don't we bring back the subsidies for food pantries. then it jammed the -- even the conservative members into voting for it. >> i'm not sure it would jam the conservative members. if you look at some of the republican policies, especially in the house, they've wanted to cut exactly these social programs in order to pay for tax cuts. i think as a reporter the interesting story here, though, is it really throws into sharp relief the kind of lobbying power that certain organizations
have like the aircraft owners and pilots association versus programs like head start and soup kitchens that don't have that kind of lobbying clout. you see the results in what's happened. >> well, let me go back to joel, then. teach me something here. fema. we think of fema to help in jersey and new york, helping families in terrible shape along the coast there. my sense is fema does that kind of work. i'm learning fema helps feed people who are generally hungry. >> there's a long-term disaster in america. 50 million americans now live in households that can't afford enough food. there's a great irony certain conservatives like representative peter king, when there was a delay in sandy relief funding to his district, went ballistic rightfully so. that the aid was delayed and he said no one should two hungry, no one should lack a roof over their head because of sandy. i just hope more people in congress would understand that there's a long-term disaster that happens every day. you know, it seems these days
congress is good at two things. making their own lives easier. and making the lives of low-income people harder. >> how do you express that with poor people? are you going to have rallies? going to have people protest? how do you get to be -- my dad used to call it a squeaky wheel. squeaky wheels, as we were just talking about here, get the grease. >> we need to rebuild the poor people's movement like dr. king did. >> or abernathy, too. ralph abernathy. >> lots of them. they actually pressured richard nixon for the creation of the safety net which reduced hunger in america. we need to better organize the 50 million americans in these straits and convince middle class americans and others it's in their collective self-interest to reduce hunger in america because no superpower in the history of the world has remained a superpower, has remained economically competitive if they let tens of millions of their own residents go hungry. >> let's thank jon stewart. he said the only food they care about is the food on the tray coming down the first class aisle. thank you, joel berg.
thank you, josh green, coming back from great reporting there. up next, senator ted cruz for president? some conservatives say he's a rock star and could be another barry goldwater. a lot of us like barry goldwater personally. i'm not sure this guy is quite as lovable, and certainly not cuddly. this is "hardball." the place for politics. used a contractor before and didn't know where to start. at angie's list, you'll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare written by people just like you. no company can pay to be on angie's list, so you can trust what you're reading. angie's list is like having thousands of close neighbors where i can go ask for personal recommendations. that's the idea. before you have any work done, check angie's list. from roofers to plumbers to dentists and more, angie's list -- reviews you can trust. i love you, angie. sorry, honey.
this is going to be fantastic. add this to the list, ted cruz to the list of republicans who may be considering running for president in 2016. the freshman from texas is a rock star to some conservative, outspoken, fearless. i buy all this, doesn't shy away, i buy all that. his new yorky remarks aren't just aimed at his political
opponents. here he is at a freedom works criticizing members of his own republican party. >> there are a lot of people that don't like to be held accountable. here was their argument. listen, before you did this the politics of it were great. dems were the bad guys and republicans the good guys. now, we all look like a bunch of squishes. well, there is an alternative. you could just not be a bunch of squishes. >> one conservative says cruz could be another barry gold water. by the way, that's an insult to barry gold water and may fire up the base. author of "what's the matter with white people." it sounds like a high school word. and he did believe there was a wider argument for background checks, what a squish is. why you're here, you're
republican and know your stuff. could the party veer that far over and go to somebody as tough as this guy? hard mind? >> it could. he's got the conservative base tied up. i believe it could go to a governor, because the mess in washington is nothing to run on. i remember when people were talking about mark sanford running for president. not so sure about ted cruz. >> what about the political spectrum, i think hillary will run a notch or two to the right of president obama. i think that's the sweet spot. i think it is. will your guy be to the right or left of mitt romney? i say to the right. >> heal be to the right of mitt romney but not ted cruz somewhere in the middle. chris christie could get the nomination. >> he wouldn't be to the right. >> he would win it because he would be the best candidate. he could possibly beat her. >> that doesn't win republican primaries. i really don't think chris christie will scratch the itch that needs to be scratched. ted cruz does it.
if there are several tea party candidates and there's rubio and rand paul, my friend, and ted cruz, maybe a christie or pence has a chance. if they get start and decide only one will run, cruz could be formidable. >> you lost one you thought you could win. i thought you could win. i thought it would be much closer. it looked like a hell of an election coming up on the first debate and then didn't work because of the demographic changes, more young people and latinos and more voted that made it harder for your party. what's your reaction when you get smacked, go hard right or the middle? >> i think it depends what's the big issue of the moment. i do think that this party is going to want to win because they're not going to want to have hillary clinton win. >> i think this looks too nasty. i think in the end politicians of any party fit a simple mode. bill clinton, likable. barack obama, no matter what they say, like the family. cruz looks so tough. >> looks really tough. can you imagine him debating hillary.
democrats would be celebrating from the beginning. the real thing, if marco rubio has really been damaged pushing for immigration reform when your party needs latin no voters, that's a certainly sign for 2016. >> the thing going on with pat toomey and marco rubio, they all found that issue to tack to the middle. ted cruz hasn't found that issue, does he want to or follow in the footsteps of jim demint and end up at the heritage foundation. >> maybe want to be the next santorum, follow to the right but own it. >> what rick santorum did was move to the center and lost and
then tacked far to the right. >> hillary clinton, i'm not her speechwriter, she will go after the worst in your party. she won't debate the guy running against her, she'll debate the worst elements in your party. >> we have gender gap problem. we have an hispanic problem. we have to have somebody that expands the base. >> what would you say the woman not your age, my age, said it's about time to have a woman president. how do you fight that argument if she's obviously qualified? >> it's a tough one. you have to find those women -- there will be a woman who will vote purely on it. you have to make it a competence issue. >> competence issue. >> i think hillary is a tough candidate for us. we'll see. i'm not going to predict that. i don't think she's going to get the nomination and i don't think she's going to run. >> you don't think she's going to run. >> it's possible.
>> let me put it this way, i hope she won't run. i think she will play it safe for now and not make too much noise and wait it out. joe biden has to wait for her. that won't be too much fun waiting. thank you for coming to the nation's capitol. anybody thinking of running against hilary clinton, i know i'm walking on coals for this. you're watching "hardball." this is america.
is the run away favorite for candidate for president. she has been strong president obama and she's been even stronger playing the role as bill clinton's counselor and knows very well what it's like to be president and when things are going well but not going so well. a word to those thinking of running against her. do it. get out there, make your case, make it positively, heroically, proudly. let people you know what you believe, what you think you're good at if you do get elected. everything i know about politics is the uncanny move is the brilliant one. put yourself in a place you can't lose because no one expects you to win. you beat the spread by jumping in the first place. i'm speaking to martin o'malley and any else contemplating a run. you never know. the sidelines is nowhere to stand if you want to know what your chances are. i try never in politics to believe in the expected.
those are the kind of people i want running the country. that's it for "hardball." "all in" with chris hayes starts now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. thank you for joining us. after a huge step forward on women's rights, a giant leap backwards today, i will explain. a sigh of relief for struggling homeowners. i will tell you the good news, rare and the best description of matrix you will hear in click 3. we begin at this houston, texas hotel. in the last hour guests have been streaming in for a banquet that kicks off the rifles gun and ammunition. they have been treated to